/m/yankees

Reader Comments and Retorts

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

If it's that easy to sprint to first base, why is our assumption that it's laziness that causes him to choose not to sprint? That seems a bit counterintuitive. Most people save their laziness for the truly arduous tasks like doing the dishes or taking the garbage down to the curb

#48 - anyone that has managed anyone else can also tell you that creating an uneven playing field is one of the best ways to quickly sow discord.

Then baseball must be nothing but discord, all the time. Because it has always been the case that the stars get away with stuff that lesser players would not dream of. And pretty much everyone who plays the game is well aware of it.

I'm just struck, as big a fan as I am of hard play, that there could be players for whom a tear-### sprint is an injury risk. There obviously are such players either acutely (somebody playing at half-strength because of a current injury) or chronically (mid-1980s Rusty Staub).

I dont think it should come as a surprise to you. If you have ever watched the summer olympics there are prime examples of this Namely in sprinting. Have you ever watched the preliminary heats? The winners invariably coast in order not to pull hammies.

That said, I dont want to defend the practice,just saying it's not suprising.

Also for the record I looked up CAno's ROE and it's just about 1.0% which is fairly pedestrian if memory serves me. Perhaps it is roughly in accord with his perceived average speed?

His taking the extra base might be a quantifiable proof of his laziness. I dont have enuf familiarity with this stat to make any comments, I think he's a bit below average just a guess.

If anything, you'd think he'd hustle out of plain old self-interest. Does he really think the Dodgers (or whatever team he expects to give him a truckful of free agent cash) aren't watching this saga and taking it into consideration?

And if his dogging it is hurting the team, it should be easy to find examples of him loafing and being out in a close play, right? Are those there?

There was a play a week or two ago. Got thrown out at 2nd trying to stretch a double into a double. In other words, at some point he realized that he had a chance at second and THEN decided to speed up. Had he been hustling from the beginning the play wouldn't have been close at all.

It was the last out of the inning and as they were going to commercial Kay said "what I want to see is if Cano was hustling out of the box. Hopefully we'll have that camera angle when we come back". They did, and he wasn't.

I've yet to see any "hits" lost because of this practice, either by Cano or by anyone else.

It's not just hits, it's bases. Cano's lost several bases and, pace Mushnick, the YES guys called him on most of them. And he generally loafs, as anyone who goes to the games can see.

The pinnacle of this was, of course, Manny Ramirez posing in Game 5 of the ALCS in 2007, an elimination game for the Red Sox, only to see his fly ball stay in the park and him wind up on first base, instead of second or third where he should have been. Ridiculous, absurd, and appalling.

Just out of curiosity, what made you omit this part below from the comment of mine you responded to? By leaving it out, you make it sound as if I'm defending a far more serious form of "loafing". Which I'm not.

I can't recall any of them, although I can recall many cases involving many players who play triples into doubles and doubles into singles by not going full speed on balls hit in the gap or balls that they mistakenly thought were home runs. Calling out players for that sort of loafing is entirely legitimate.

But as to the part about "loafing" to first on routine ground balls, I've yet to see any evidence that it's ever cost Cano (or anyone else) anything. That link in #106 certainly doesn't show any evidence of anything other than a play that nobody could have beaten out.

Jeter has ROE 183 times in 11916 PAs (1.5%), which I thought was a lot.
Does anybody ROE more than Jeter?

He's the active leader on ROE. I can't think of anyone offhand who fits the profile to do so at a higher rate (though, to be fair, ROE rate should be based on AB rather than PA, since it would otherwise punish those who walk).

But as to the part about "loafing" to first on routine ground balls, I've yet to see any evidence that it's ever cost Cano (or anyone else) anything.

That's incredibly silly (not the part about Cano, but "anyone"). Of course there are players whose loafing cost them times on base. It doesn't often cost them hits, since most batters know when there's a chance for an IH and act accordingly (though Manny did so a few years back during his Last Days in Boston Act). But certainly there are plays where an ROE was possible but loafing prevented it. B.J. Upton had one a few years ago that produced a thread. You probably commented on it.*

That link in #106 certainly doesn't show any evidence of anything other than a play that nobody could have beaten out.

But it also shows evidence of a batter who loafed before it was apparent it was a play that couldn't be beaten out. For instance, if an infielder mishandles the grounder, that's often enough time for the runner to convert a groundout into an beaten throw. There was no chance of that on that play. The second baseman who fielded it could have dropped the ball, made out his will, done 10 pushups and still have thrown Cano out.

But as to the part about "loafing" to first on routine ground balls, I've yet to see any evidence that it's ever cost Cano (or anyone else) anything.

That's incredibly silly (not the part about Cano, but "anyone"). Of course there are players whose loafing cost them times on base. It doesn't often cost them hits, since most batters know when there's a chance for an IH and act accordingly (though Manny did so a few years back during his Last Days in Boston Act). But certainly there are plays where an ROE was possible but loafing prevented it. B.J. Upton had one a few years ago that produced a thread. You probably commented on it.*

* Just playing the odds.

All I'm saying is show me an actual example. It would have to be a case where an otherwise routine non-close call play was botched by a throw that pulled the first baseman off the bag, and far enough off the bag that not loafing would have made the runner safe. I've never seen a play like that, but perhaps you can pull up some link as evidence.

--------------------------------------------------

That link in #106 certainly doesn't show any evidence of anything other than a play that nobody could have beaten out.

But it also shows evidence of a batter who loafed before it was apparent it was a play that couldn't be beaten out. For instance, if an infielder mishandles the grounder, that's often enough time for the runner to convert a groundout into an beaten throw. There was no chance of that on that play. The second baseman who fielded it could have dropped the ball, made out his will, done 10 pushups and still have thrown Cano out.

That link in #106 shows Cano hitting a routine ground ball towards second** and then trundling down to first. By the time he's anywhere near the bag the first baseman has already thrown the ball around the infield. The camera shows nothing else, and there's absolutely no evidence that "hustling" would have resulted in anything but the throw beating Cano by a few steps less. It certainly wouldn't have made it close.

**You can tell by where the ball first hits the ground that it wasn't hit overly hard, and you can tell by how quickly the ball made it to first that the ball wasn't squibbled or topped, either of which might have resulted in a much closer play, and either of which would have caused Cano to run at full speed.

If anything, you'd think he'd hustle out of plain old self-interest. Does he really think the Dodgers (or whatever team he expects to give him a truckful of free agent cash) aren't watching this saga and taking it into consideration?

All I'm saying is show me an actual example. It would have to be a case where an otherwise routine non-close call play was botched by a throw that pulled the first baseman off the bag, and far enough off the bag that not loafing would have made the runner safe. I've never seen a play like that, but perhaps you can pull up some link as evidence.

How about what appears to be a routine ground ball that is kicked by an infielder, who has time to recover and get the guy who loafed out of the box? Are you seriously suggesting that you have never seen that happen in your long history of baseball watching?

But in case you've genuinely forgotten more baseball than most people have ever seen, simply type B.J. Upton hustle into the search bar at the top of the page. You'll find two examples in a two-week period in 2008 (and a third of the out-at-second variety).

All I'm saying is show me an actual example. It would have to be a case where an otherwise routine non-close call play was botched by a throw that pulled the first baseman off the bag, and far enough off the bag that not loafing would have made the runner safe. I've never seen a play like that, but perhaps you can pull up some link as evidence.

How about what appears to be a routine ground ball that is kicked by an infielder, who has time to recover and get the guy who loafed out of the box? Are you seriously suggesting that you have never seen that happen in your long history of baseball watching?

Shoot me, but the answer is no. I'm not saying that it's never happened, but when you have to go back to 2008 in our cornucopia of Pinata Posts to come up with a possible instance of actual damage, that doesn't exactly bolster your case.

But in case you've genuinely forgotten more baseball than most people have ever seen, simply type B.J. Upton hustle into the search bar at the top of the page. You'll find two examples in a two-week period in 2008 (and a third of the out-at-second variety).

One of those threads centered on a bobbled ground ball to the pitcher, where the writer said "it might have been close" if Upton had hustled. It didn't even say that he might have been safe.

The second was on a DP, which is a different case altogether. But I'd never defend a runner not hustling on a potential DP ball, since there's always the potential for a botched transfer on the pivot. Note that it was only that DP case that caused Maddon to bench Upton.

Todd Zeile's loafing in the 2000 World Series is exactly the sort of showboating / loafing that frequently brings about tangible damage to the player's team. At this point I've been shown exactly no instances where that was the case for the sort of play that Cano was involved in.

My issue with the lack of hustle is not necessarily the specific plays but the bat habits. If you're first instinct isn't "run hard" out of the box then you are likely to lose a step even on a ball that you should be running hard on. Baseball is a game of repetition and working hard on the mundane situations means you'll be doing it from the get go when it matters. Doesn't make Cano a bad player or someone I don't want on my team, but it's a weakness and a correctable one at that.

Todd Zeile's loafing in the 2000 World Series is exactly the sort of showboating / loafing that frequently brings about tangible damage to the player's team. At this point I've been shown exactly no instances where that was the case for the sort of play that Cano was involved in.

OK, are you referring to the dribbler off the bat of Zeile that went up the third-base line?

My issue with the lack of hustle is not necessarily the specific plays but the bat habits. If you're first instinct isn't "run hard" out of the box then you are likely to lose a step even on a ball that you should be running hard on. Baseball is a game of repetition and working hard on the mundane situations means you'll be doing it from the get go when it matters. Doesn't make Cano a bad player or someone I don't want on my team, but it's a weakness and a correctable one at that.

Concur 100%. There's no reason a batter should be thinking, "should I hustle/shouldn't I hustle". Just run.

That link in #106 certainly doesn't show any evidence of anything other than a play that nobody could have beaten out.

But it also shows evidence of a batter who loafed before it was apparent it was a play that couldn't be beaten out. For instance, if an infielder mishandles the grounder, that's often enough time for the runner to convert a groundout into an beaten throw. There was no chance of that on that play. The second baseman who fielded it could have dropped the ball, made out his will, done 10 pushups and still have thrown Cano out.

The ball was fielded by the first baseman. He had it, in Cano's vision, before Cano had taken two steps. If the first baseman fields a ball within 15 feet of the base while you're at home plate, no, you don't need to run hard.

How about what appears to be a routine ground ball that is kicked by an infielder, who has time to recover and get the guy who loafed out of the box? Are you seriously suggesting that you have never seen that happen in your long history of baseball watching?

But in case you've genuinely forgotten more baseball than most people have ever seen, simply type B.J. Upton hustle into the search bar at the top of the page. You'll find two examples in a two-week period in 2008 (and a third of the out-at-second variety).

Of course I've seen it. Not a lot, but enough. And, yes, there are lots of players who don't hustle much out of the gate. BJ is certainly one of them. I'm not debating generalities, I'm asking about Robinson Cano, who I don't get to watch much. The posts in this thread make it sound like he's costing himself bases on, if not a daily, a weekly basis. Go find some examples. As I said above, EVERY player, once a fielder, espeically one on the right side, cleanly fields a ball, slows down. It's how the game is played. When you see a liner caught on the infield, the batter peels off. It isn't little league where you're supposed to run through the base no matter how long you've been out.

My issue with the lack of hustle is not necessarily the specific plays but the bat habits. If you're first instinct isn't "run hard" out of the box then you are likely to lose a step even on a ball that you should be running hard on. Baseball is a game of repetition and working hard on the mundane situations means you'll be doing it from the get go when it matters. Doesn't make Cano a bad player or someone I don't want on my team, but it's a weakness and a correctable one at that.

I agree with this 100%. My guess is that Cano could probably go a little harder. As I've said, over and over, were I his coach, I'd work on it with him and it would tick me off if he simply refused. Given how much he's improved his defense over the years, I suspect he either has or would work with a coach on this. But the data simply doesn't support the notion that this flaw in his game is costing either him or the Yankees much. If he can't make the adjustment, then that is a legitimate ding against him as a player. But it's an exceedingly small one given the other stuff he brings to the table.

My guess is there will be very few groundouts (as in, one a year, perhaps) where the behavior of a slow runner out of the box makes a difference. You're a lot more likely to find it in gappers that are singles. But you can't just look at him coming across the base. You have to see him from the start.

Also, I'm not asking you to do this. A lot of you watch him much more than me. You probably have seen it. It wouldn't surprise me at all if he doesn't routinely bust it out of the box (as he should). But to convince me it is a major issue (other than just giving you nausea) you'll have to find, a lot, of examples where it costs him a base. Not hypothetical bases, actual bases lost.

(If I were you, convincing me wouldn't be worth the effort, but my initial questions were completely sincere. I haven't ever, to my knowledge, seen Cano play in person. I do recall from days seeing Jeter in person that that was impressive about him. He really did bust it out of the box every time. I don't know if he still does - wouldn't blame him at this point if he doesn't - but it was pretty cool.)

When I was a wee lad, I went through a tennis thing. I watched a LOT of tennis. And when a player would be beaten on a winner across the court or something, he or she would bow to the inevitable and slow down. I used to rage about this. Then I became a high schooler and played a bit of long-form competitive tennis. I realized then that it's at least partially an endurance battle. These players were conserving a precious, non-renewable resource by not going all-out on every play. I dunno; maybe they can push a little bit of mustard on that backhand later in the match by using the energy conserved by not running in a hopeless situation. These guys have lost a billion points in their careers; they know what it looks like.

Sure, there was the occasional fan-favorite like Michael Chang who ran hard all the time. And he might have had to in order to stay in the upper tier of competitive tennis (I think he actually made #1 for a period of time). But expecting Agassi or Courier to play like from my couch is just an exercise in frustration. They can't hear me through the TV, and they in consultation with their coaches clearly made the decision for competitive reasons to do that.

EVERY player, once a fielder, especially one on the right side, cleanly fields a ball, slows down. It's how the game is played

That's my take on the link in #106, for sure. It's one thing to run head-down when you hit a grounder to 3B, but when the play is in front of you, and the fielders have time to drop the ball, fall down, tie their shoes, and text their girlfriends before you could get to first base on the dead run, nobody goes on the dead run.

Much of the debate seems to be a moral one, and I'm as much of a moralist as anybody. I like to see people play hard. I am not convinced by the "conserve your energy" argument, because running during baseball games is what these guys should be conserving their energy for. A close infield play, to follow TVErik's analogy, is their backhand-late-in-the-match.

But if Cano is at risk for injury in a way that's real but not Juan-Gonzalez apparent, then I don't think it's a moral failing to avoid the frantic break from the batter's box. And we can lecture the guy all we like, but we don't actually know his level of injury risk. All we really know is that he never misses a game, and plays at a level that very few second basemen have ever bettered.

All we really know is that he never misses a game, and plays at a level that very few second basemen have ever bettered.

Yep. Absent quantifiable evidence that his loafery running to first is costing X number of runs (anecdotes about how he lollygagged in 2009 and got thrown out at 2nd don't count), this is really an aesthetic issue. All things being equal, I'd like the players on my favorite teams to hustle. But I'd much prefer them to be good players. And all things are very rarely equal.

My idea (and it wouldn't be a really popular one) is that a new coach in spring training says "Robinson, if you wish to take your game (and salary) to the next level, running hard out of the batter's box all the time would be a great way to do it. The suits who write the checks tend to reward visible hustle; here's how to do it." And then the ball's in his court - if he chooses not to do so, it has been addressed and it's a competition/game manager issue.

agree with [130] that this is a moral debate. And I think it's tied into the belief that baseball is just a "game" instead of a job. Games are fun, and I'd like to play games for a living and thus I would try really hard all the time if given the chance! I doubt most people on this thread "hustle" every moment of their job. And I don't think it's accurate to presume that the moment of a routine grounder is that much more important than other elements of Cano's job. For example, he might try really hard with studying scouting reports, or working in the cage etc etc. THOSE moments might be where hustle is important, even if it's mental hustle. The grounder in the 4th inning hit to the 2nd baseman is just where we get to see his hustle on display, and we over rate its value.

Absent quantifiable evidence that his loafery running to first is costing X number of runs

True; and again, the fact that he's playing at a HOF level through his first nine seasons tends to indicate that Cano's getting everything he can out of his talent. It's plausible that he could be super-ultra-great instead of merely great if he ran harder, but that argument is harder to sustain than one about a mediocre player who clearly seems to be underperforming his potential. It's like saying Rod Carew could have been Rogers Hornsby if he'd swung the bat like he meant it once in a while :)

It's "how to succeed in business 101". If you know how to look extremely busy all the time, you get ahead. It doesn't actually matter if you're accomplishing anything, in some ways accomplishing things works against you. I know a guy who has been spinning his wheels uselessly for years and gets rewarded with promotion after promotion. Meanwhile others actually do twice as much stuff as him and are stuck, position and salary-wise.

Shoot me, but the answer is no. I'm not saying that it's never happened, but when you have to go back to 2008 in our cornucopia of Pinata Posts to come up with a possible instance of actual damage, that doesn't exactly bolster your case.

It's the one I remembered off the top of my head, probably because B.J. was building a nice rap sheet for that type of thing at that point in time. But instances like it happen every year (though Robinson Cano could very well go a career and never have it cost him an actual time on base* - I don't think it's that common).

The issue, for many of us, is you can do all the other things, such as study those scouting reports and do the extra work in the cage and absolutely none of that prevents you from getting in the habit of routinely running out of the box. It doesn't have to be balls out, but at a pace that allows you to take advantage of that bobble or bad hop. Now, if you have specific injury concerns, rather than theoretical ones, the calculus is much different. No one's said otherwise. But an ordinary, healthy ballplayer who can't be bothered to run out of the box is making himself a lesser player, for no particular reason.

There is a reason Jeter leads all active players in ROE, and it's not simply because he's righthanded and hits the ball on the ground a lot (though that is the lion's share of it).

And snapper was right. Your distinction between the double play ball and the other grounders is, indeed, quite weak.

* Jogging on what appears to be routine grounders. Jogging on all grounders, which that one video shows that Cano doesn't do, would indeed cost every ballplayer many bases over a baseballing lifetime.

The ball [hit by Cano in the link in #106] was fielded by the first baseman. He had it, in Cano's vision, before Cano had taken two steps. If the first baseman fields a ball within 15 feet of the base while you're at home plate, no, you don't need to run hard.

Since I'd previously thought that the ball had been hit to the second baseman, this makes harping on Cano's "loafing" even sillier than I'd thought.

------------------------------------------------

The issue, for many of us, is you can do all the other things, such as study those scouting reports and do the extra work in the cage and absolutely none of that prevents you from getting in the habit of routinely running out of the box. It doesn't have to be balls out, but at a pace that allows you to take advantage of that bobble or bad hop. Now, if you have specific injury concerns, rather than theoretical ones, the calculus is much different. No one's said otherwise. But an ordinary, healthy ballplayer who can't be bothered to run out of the box is making himself a lesser player, for no particular reason.

In a perfect world it's probably better to see every batter run full speed out of the box until the first baseman has put him out, but in the real world of baseball, Cano-style "loafing" is little more than an aesthetic affront. And I still haven't seen any visual evidence that such "loafing" has ever caused a batter to be out on a close play where otherwise he would have beaten the throw.

I have, however, seen plenty of assertions and assumptions that Cano-style "loafing" has cost a batter an out. But it's funny how with every play recorded, and bloggers posting everyday instances of moral failures on the part of ballplayers, that the best visual "evidence" I've seen posted up to now is the one of Cano not trying to beat out a ground ball to the first baseman.

Again, the sort of "loafing" that you see on balls erroneously thought by the batter to be home runs is another thing altogether, along with not running out routine popups/fly balls (especially with two outs), and not going full speed on balls hit safely to the outfield where the batter erroneously assumes a clean play. Yankee fans got a perfect example of the virtues of not loafing in that second category when Mark Teixeira took off from first full speed on what looked like a routine game ending popup in a game against the Mets, and wound up scoring the winning run when the second baseman apparently lost the ball in his thoughts.

But Cano is SLOW. And a lefty who hits lots of balls in the air. He could run as hard as you like and he'd be nowhere close to Jeter on the ROE front. Again, show me evidence that Cano loafing to 1B out of box is costing runs. Quantify it. Otherwise it's just grumping about aesthetics.

It's the one I remembered off the top of my head, probably because B.J. was building a nice rap sheet for that type of thing at that point in time. But instances like it happen every year (though Robinson Cano could very well go a career and never have it cost him an actual time on base* - I don't think it's that common).

* Jogging on what appears to be routine grounders. Jogging on all grounders, which that one video shows that Cano doesn't do, would indeed cost every ballplayer many bases over a baseballing lifetime.

Just to be clear, you're NOT saying that Cano has even once cost his team a base by not running full speed on balls like the one in the video clip.

All you're saying is that IF Cano ran out non-routine grounders the way he runs out balls like the one in that video clip, he would cost his team "many bases over a baseballing lifetime."

Of course since there's no evidence that Cano has ever loafed on non-routine grounders, I'm not sure where you're trying to go with that point. At bottom all you're doing is asserting your aesthetic preferences, a preference I happen to agree with, but one I realize is just that : A mere matter of aesthetics.

But Cano is SLOW. And a lefty who hits lots of balls in the air. He could run as hard as you like and he'd be nowhere close to Jeter on the ROE front. Again, show me evidence that Cano loafing to 1B out of box is costing runs. Quantify it. Otherwise it's just grumping about aesthetics.

Of course he wouldn't. Never said he would. Then again, I haven't been talking about Cano.

The point is, one factor in Jeter leading all active big leaguers in ROE, by a pretty fair margin, is the fact that he routinely hustles on ground balls. Andy, bizarrely, thinks routinely running out of the box has absolutely no bearing on how frequently one reaches base.

Just to be clear, you're NOT saying that Cano has even once cost his team a base by not running full speed on balls like the one in the video clip.

I don't watch nearly enough Yankee games to have an opinion on Robinson Cano's running habits. And for the record, I don't really give a #### about Robby Cano's running habits.

All you're saying is that IF Cano ran out non-routine grounders the way he runs out balls like the one in that video clip, he would cost his team "many bases over a baseballing lifetime."

That's not all I'm saying. But yes, one who routinely jogs out of the box on all balls is going to cost himself many times on base. Someone who jogs on balls that appear to be routine is likely going to cost himself some bases/outs over the course of the career. Seeing as I think there's no risk for a healthy player in making a habit to simply run out of the box after putting the ball in play, the players who choose not to are likely making themselves slightly less effective for no reason whatsoever. That's not aesthetics.

The point is, one factor in Jeter leading all active big leaguers in ROE, by a pretty fair margin, is the fact that he routinely hustles on ground balls. Andy, bizarrely, thinks routinely running out of the box has absolutely no bearing on how frequently one reaches base.

The biggest factors, by far, are that Jeter hits tons of ground balls to the left side of the infield and was, until this season, very fast. Pretty much all players hustle when they think they have a legit shot at an infield hit. I've watched countless Yankee games; Jeter most certainly does not bust it 100% on a routine tapper back to the pitcher, or an infield popup. He runs, but he's nowhere near going all out.

That's not all I'm saying. But yes, one who routinely jogs out of the box on all balls is going to cost himself many times on base. Someone who jogs on balls that appear to be routine is likely going to cost himself some bases/outs over the course of the career. Seeing as I think there's no risk for a healthy player in making a habit to simply run out of the box after putting the ball in play, the players who choose not to are likely making themselves slightly less effective for no reason whatsoever. That's not aesthetics.

Unless and until you provide quantifiable evidence, then it's nothing but aesthetics. Nothing wrong with an aesthetic argument, but don't try to make it something else.

Of course since there's no evidence that Cano has ever loafed on non-routine grounders, I'm not sure where you're trying to go with that point.

He loafed a double into an out a couple weeks ago, which everyone on YES acknowleged and the replay clearly showed.(*) That was a "non-routine" hit.

(*) Not that one was needed given how long it took him to get to second.

I'm seriously wondering whether you've got some sort of comprehension deficiency, since I've repeatedly offered no justification for not sprinting out of the box on balls hit to the outfield, or on any balls other than the sort shown in #106. How many times must I repeat this for you to understand it? Or are you just reasserting a generic stand for moral rectitude?

-------------------------------------------

Just to be clear, you're NOT saying that Cano has even once cost his team a base by not running full speed on balls like the one in the video clip.

I don't watch nearly enough Yankee games to have an opinion on Robinson Cano's running habits. And for the record, I don't really give a #### about Robby Cano's running habits.

So I guess the assertion that not sprinting on routine grounders a la #106 comes down to what, B.J. Upton not making it a bit closer on a ground ball hit back to the pitcher? One example out of how many available years of YouTube clips and pinata posts?

All you're saying is that IF Cano ran out non-routine grounders the way he runs out balls like the one in that video clip, he would cost his team "many bases over a baseballing lifetime."

That's not all I'm saying. But yes, one who routinely jogs out of the box on all balls is going to cost himself many times on base.

No disagreement there, as I've repeatedly stated.

Someone who jogs on balls that appear to be routine is likely going to cost himself some bases/outs over the course of the career.

But no evidence there beyond assertion and assumption. Even the writer who cited that Upton example wasn't claiming it cost him the base.

The biggest factors, by far, are that Jeter hits tons of ground balls to the left side of the infield and was, until this season, very fast. Pretty much all players hustle when they think they have a legit shot at an infield hit. I've watched countless Yankee games; Jeter most certainly does not bust it 100% on a routine tapper back to the pitcher, or an infield popup. He runs, but he's nowhere near going all out.

Having watched the great majority of Yankees games since 2002, I can certainly back up that statement.

I'm seriously wondering whether you've got some sort of comprehension deficiency, since I've repeatedly offered no justification for not sprinting out of the box on balls hit to the outfield, or on any balls other than the sort shown in #106. How many times must I repeat this for you to understand it? Or are you just reasserting a generic stand for moral rectitude?

I'm questioning the blinkered criteria you're suggesting we apply to this issue, as if all that matters is beating out grounders. There's certainly no reason to think Cano has squandered ROEs, given his general proclivities, but that's hardly the only measuring stick we can apply.

There is a reason Jeter leads all active players in ROE, and it's not simply because he's righthanded and hits the ball on the ground a lot (though that is the lion's share of it).

Yes, and the reason (aside from the one you listed) is that Jeter is/was FAST.

Yeah, well those, and maybe because he leads all active players in AB, by quite a bit. He's got 800 more AB, 350 fewer HR, and 300 fewer strikeouts than Alex Rodriguez in second place, so 1450 more chances to reach on an error.

Yeah, well those, and maybe because he leads all active players in AB, by quite a bit. He's got 800 more AB, 350 fewer HR, and 300 fewer strikeouts than Alex Rodriguez in second place, so 1450 more chances to reach on an error.

Yes, and he reaches on error with more frequency on his groundballs than Alex* has, who reaches on error with more frequency than Albert Pujols.

I readily acknowledge that his handedness and GB tendencies are the primary reason Jeter leads all of baseball by a wide margin on ROE. I'm simply stating that his tendency to run out of the box (not necessarily 100 percent every time, GF, but run rather than jog) plays a role in that total.

Regardless how fast a guy is, there are going to be close plays at first on ground balls that are mishandled in some way. If getting out of the box at a run, rather than a trot, is routine, a player is going to get more close plays to go his way.

* Who, by the way, is a better player than Cano ever will be but was not a loafer out of the box.

Of course since there's no evidence that Cano has ever loafed on non-routine grounders, I'm not sure where you're trying to go with that point.

You can't say there's no evidence. Just because the evidence wouldn't be easy to recover doesn't mean there isn't any.

What we do know is that Cano loafed through his 2008 season (it got so bad that Joe Girardi ended up benching him in September), so it wouldn't surprise me if the evidence did turn up, should somebody take the bother to look. He has history.

I'm seriously wondering whether you've got some sort of comprehension deficiency, since I've repeatedly offered no justification for not sprinting out of the box on balls hit to the outfield, or on any balls other than the sort shown in #106. How many times must I repeat this for you to understand it? Or are you just reasserting a generic stand for moral rectitude?

I'm questioning the blinkered criteria you're suggesting we apply to this issue, as if all that matters is beating out grounders. There's certainly no reason to think Cano has squandered ROEs, given his general proclivities, but that's hardly the only measuring stick we can apply.

That's great, but why were you addressing that point to me, since the ONLY "loafing" I've been defending is the "loafing" out of the batters box on routine ground balls, of the type seen in #106. There's a complete disconnect between your intended point and your chosen target, since I've repeatedly criticized players who "loaf" on any other type of play.

----------------------------------------------------------

Of course since there's no evidence that Cano has ever loafed on non-routine grounders, I'm not sure where you're trying to go with that point.

You can't say there's no evidence. Just because the evidence wouldn't be easy to recover doesn't mean there isn't any.

Given that half the MSM writers and TV reporters seemingly have the NSA at hand to sniff out any lack of Old School virtues on the part of modern athletes, I'd be much more inclined to infer that the lack of posted evidence is more a product of the lack of any such evidence than it is a lack of trying on the part of the media. And with all the "Cano the lollygag" sentiment out there among a certain breed of Yankees fans equipped with video cameras, why aren't we seeing anything more damning than #106 on YouTube?